Cycling UK Forum

garlik is majic for headcolds.chop a piece up and wash it down with water.no smell.you will feel it co to work right away.it is also very good at removing pimples even if they have been their for years.rub the juice on about 3 times a day

And sticking your finger up a sheep's bottom on Easter Sunday prevents baldness.

There's a word for herbal and alternative remedies that have been shown to work - "medicine".

It is somewhat arrogant of some scientists, who like to pretend that they know more than they actually do, to claim that that list is now complete.

meic wrote:It is somewhat arrogant of some scientists, who like to pretend that they know more than they actually do, to claim that that list is now complete.

No-one's saying the list is complete. The important words are "have been shown to work". Potential medicines fall into three categories:

1. Been shown to work
2. Been shown not to work
3. Not been demonstrated either way.

Garlic - http://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pubmed/20120123 - "the clinical evidence is far from compelling" - code for number 2 above.

I think that in time when the scientists have learnt a bit more, and they understand that people are not all the same and diseases are not as simple as they pretend and a few other things that they are missing, then they will start to discover that in the right circumstances many things do work afterall.

I could "prove" that electricity doesnt work by using wires that dont actually have conductors in them.
Which is about the level of understanding that we have in the fields of real medicine.

I have seen a few revolutions in medical thinking in just my short lifetime and still the Doctors act as if they know everything.

Well the vote is so far 15 to one in favour of the virus theory - I haven't voted yet and I think that one vote against the virus theory is yours meic.

I didnt vote against virus theory, I just refuse to accept "virus-only" theory.

Virus is only part of the picture and it is a human decision to concentrate on just that aspect of the illness, rather than a law of nature.

I havent voted by the way as, like the rest of you, I dont know the right answer.

Then who did vote against the virus theory? Everyone else has said that they support it in some measure at least. (I haven't said anything yet, or voted.)

I dont dispute the virus theory, just as I dont dispute that chickens grow from eggs.

So long as the eggs are fertilised and incubated.

karlt wrote:Hardly a "hot" topic. The germ theory of disease is now established and has been for over a hundred years, and not only do we know it applies to the common cold, we even know exactly which viruses are involved.

karlt: I just found this on Wikipedia (that font of all wisdom). Is it true as it seems to disagree with your comment:

For example, the rhinovirus is typically acquired by direct contact; it binds to human ICAM-1 receptors through unknown mechanisms to trigger the release of inflammatory mediators.[28

If anyone can throw some light on this as well (from http://www.webmd.com/cold-and-flu/cold- ... old_causes):

Coronaviruses and the Common Cold

Scientists think coronaviruses cause a large percentage of adult colds. These cold viruses are most active in the winter and early spring. Of the more than 30 kinds of coronaviruses, three or four infect humans. The importance of coronaviruses as a cause of colds is hard to assess because, unlike rhinoviruses, they are difficult to grow in the laboratory.

Other Causes of the Common Cold

About 10% to 15% of adult colds are caused by viruses also responsible for other, more severe respiratory illnesses.

The causes of 30% to 50% of adult colds, presumed to be viral, remain unidentified. The same viruses that produce colds in adults appear to cause colds in children. The relative importance of various viruses in children's colds, however, is unclear because it's difficult to isolate the precise cause of symptoms in studies of children with colds.

This is quite interesting too (from http://www.commoncold.org/undrstn3.htm):

The virus then attaches to a receptor (ICAM-1) which is located on the surface of nasal cells. (11) The receptor fits into a docking port on the surface of the virus. Large amounts of virus receptor are present on cells of the adenoid. (12)

That's quite strange because it seems to imply that the human body puts out a welcome mat for the virus. Can anyone explain this? It also says:

The virus is then transported to the back of the nose and onto the adenoid area by the nose itself!

I am wondering now whose side the human body is on!

I've added a bit to my previous post and in case anyone still supports the weakened immune theory here is this (from http://www.commoncold.org/special1.htm):

Myth 1:


The greatest myth about the common cold is that susceptibility to colds requires a weakened immune system.
Facts:

1. Healthy people with normal immune systems are highly susceptible to cold virus infection once the virus enters the nose. In volunteers studies, approximately 95% of normal adults became infected when virus was dropped into the nose (72, also see How Cold Virus Infection Occurs).

2. Of people who become infected, only 75% develop symptoms with a cold. (5, 72) The other 25% have virus growing in the nose but have no symptoms. They have an "asymptomatic infection".

3. Why people sometimes become infected but do not develop cold symptoms is a mystery. One clue is that in such instances the person may not be producing the normal amount of certain inflammatory mediators, the natural body chemicals which cause cold symptoms (2, also see What Causes Cold Symptoms). If this theory is correct, then people with active immune systems may be more prone to developing cold symptoms than people with less active immune systems!

The vote BTW stands at 17:1 in favour of the virus theory and we still don't know who submitted the 1 vote (and nor should we as it is a secret ballot! ) As I am Returning Officer I haven't voted.

OK. Amend to "we even know exactly which viruses in the majority of cases."

1. It's a virus. It may not be just rhinoviruses or coronaviruses, and some cold-like symptoms may be caused by other agencies, but if you assume it's a virus then you'll not be far wrong. After all, it might be flu, which is also a virus.

2. Rhinoviruses love cool nasal passages, but not too cool. Cycling with a cold may make your upper respiratory tract too cold for them to thrive, but if you're sucking in cold air then some part of your lower respiratory tract will likely be at the absolutely ideal temperature, and accelerated breathing will pull them down there very efficiently. Then you won't (just) have a cold, you'll have a nice dose of bronchitis and/or, with a bit of diligence, pneumonia.

3. Once your respiratory passages are nicely inflamed they are more easily infected by other viruses and bacteria. Hence the "cold" that lasts a month and churns out green glue by the yard.

4. By all means take it to work. Everyone will love you, especially the ones who are about to go on holiday. And do make sure to sit beside the marketing manager in meetings.

5. Wait until you're at the back of the pace line to blow a snot rocket.

Well the vote finally reached 22:1 in favour of a virus being the cause and I think the poll has now run its course (rather like a cold in fact!).

I've done a fair amount of "research" (aka Googling) since the poll started but I haven't found anything yet particularly convincing to back up the virus theory. There is definitely a virus present but its role appears to be fairly benign as far as I can see. Common sense and experience tells me that cold symptoms are a pretty straightforward human response to changing environmental conditions. The nice thing with this view is that you no longer have to worry about catching a cold from someone else!

I ran the poll as I was curious to see what cyclists made of the common cold as they are generally "outdoor types" who tend to shrug off these things (whatever the cause). So I was a bit surprised at the result. Nevertheless, I've added my vote to the second option of the common cold being a reponse to conditions rather than being caused by a virus, which makes it 22:2.

If anyone can point to anything that might change my mind on this I would be very happy to peruse it.

Bunch of references down here http://www.cardiff.ac.uk/biosi/subsites ... ncold.html for you to follow up. The probability has to be against you - ask yourself "is it more likely that I'm right and the entire medical and scientific establishment is wrong, or the other way around?"